Stephen Fry is the grandson of British Jewish immigrants, who made a documentary for the BBC on his life-long passion for Wagner, the composer whose music is most closely associated with Nazism. Fry had relatives who died at Auschwitz. “Imagine a great beautiful silk tapestry of infinite colour and complexity that has been stained indelibly. It’s still a beautiful tapestry of miraculous workmanship, but that stain is real, and I’m afraid Hitler and Nazism have stained Wagner. For some people that stain ruins the whole work; for others, it’s just something you have to face up to.”

By nearly all accounts from fellow players and those who knew him, baseball’s Ty Cobb was a mean, nasty individual–but sports aficionado’s still count him as one of the greatest players in history.

Liberals point to Watergate and the crudeness of oval office diatribes, but tend to ignore the fact that Richard Nixon was a key advocate for the environment. Acting against Republican business interests, his administration championed the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts and created the Environmental Protection Agency. Conservatives may point to President Bill Clinton’s sexual dalliance with an intern and tend to ignore his championing of welfare reform against the wishes of many members of his own party and his record of being the only president in modern times that actually reduced the size of the federal workforce.

Movie director Roman Polanski, who directed the Jack Nicholson classic film Chinatown, was arrested in 1977 for the statutory rape of 13-year-old girl and plead guilty. To avoid sentencing he fled the U.S. and has never returned. In 2002, Polanski won the best director Oscar for The Pianist.

Hoffman was one of the best actors of his generation; his performances in films such as Capote and Charlie Wilson’s War were remarkable accomplishments for an actor who did not fit the more typical Hollywood “pretty boy” image. He was also a heroin junkie whose overdose death would not likely make the local news, let alone generate national news or comment, were it not for his fame and talent. If there is anything to be gained from this sad news is that it may bring more attention to the costs of substance abuse within personal lives and put a greater spotlight on public and philanthropic efforts to combat it.

Woody Allen’s case is more complicated and deserves special attention. Not just because of who the acclaimed film director and screenwriter is, but of what we must consider in such cases. As most know, Dylan Farrow penned an open letter revealing details of the sexual abuse she claims happened 20 years ago at the hands of her adopted father. One of her brothers has different view. Moses Farrow told People Magazine, “Of course Woody did not molest my sister.” In fact, he claims that Allen’s then-girlfriend Mia Farrow was abusive:”My mother drummed it into me to hate my father for tearing apart the family and sexually molesting my sister. And I hated him for her for years. I see now that this was a vengeful way to pay him back for falling in love with Soon-Yi.”

Washington state residents might be more particularly mindful about the veracity of such charges given the Wenatchee witch hunt of 1994 and 1995 In which forty-three adults were arrested on 29,726 charges of child sex abuse, involving 60 children; Child Protective Services removed some fifty children from accused parents and relocated them in foster homes. Eventually, all those who were convicted were either freed by higher courts had their convictions overturned or pled guilty on lesser, usually unrelated, charges in exchange for the prosecution dropping the charges of sexual abuse. Five served their full sentences before their cases were overturned.

In the same state, in February of 2013, former Vancouver police officer Ray Spencer was awarded nine million dollars by a Tacoma jury for wrongful prosecution. Spencer spent a decade in prison after being sentenced to two life prison terms plus 14 years. Investigators found that prosecutors had withheld medical exams showing that there was no physical evidence of abuse, even though the child’s mother contended they had been repeatedly raped.

In this case, it is worth noting that Spencer’s natural children eventually testified in they were never molested or raped by their father, to this day, his step-son has refused to recant and contends that he was molested.

“Believing the victim” is sometimes the best policy, sometimes it is not. My own analysis of cleared and exonerated cases (those falsely convicted and ultimately released) in my book When Women Sexually Abuse Men(Cook/Hodo, Praeger 2103) finds that 21% of the total were in cases of child or adult rape or sexual abuse cases.

The Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect analyzed data from 7,672 child maltreatment investigations. Among the 798 cases of alleged sexual abuse, only 38 percent were substantiated. Most professionals believe that the proportion of false allegations of child sexual abuse is highest in divorce and custody disputes. Writing in the journal “Forensics” the authors report that out of five hundred divorce and custody cases, “For three-fourths there was no determination of abuse by the legal system. That is, charges were dropped or never filed or the person was acquitted in criminal court, or there was no finding of abuse in family court. Dwyer (1986) reports similar statistics. She states that 77% of the divorce-linked allegations of sex abuse cases coming to the Human Sexuality Program at the University of Minnesota have turned out to be hoax cases. This was based upon the opinion reached by the agency staff that the allegations were not accurate.”

Samuel R. Gross in a research paper for the University Of Michigan School Of Law found that the false rape conviction rate in which physical evidence was examined by the Virginia Department of Forensic Science from 1973 through 1987 found an innocent rate of least 3.2 to five percent, and “almost certainly quite a few more.” A major study in a Midwestern city over the course of nine years reported in the “Archives of Sexual Behavior” found 41 percent of all rape claims were false. Gross also reports that an analysis of police records at two large state universities found 50 percent of the rapes reported to campus police were determined to be false. As reported in “Forensic Science” by researcher Charles McDowell an Air Force study evaluated 556 rape allegations, and concluded that 60 percent were false. Somewhat unusually, the Air Force study attempted to determine the reasons behind why such accusations were made. From most frequent to least frequent they were: Spite or Revenge; To compensate for feelings of guilt or shame; Thought she might be pregnant; To conceal an affair; To test husband’s love; Mental/emotional disorder; To avoid personal responsibility; Failure to pay, or extortion; Thought she might have caught VD.

Speaking of all types of wrongful convictions or accusations, Gross adds: “If as few as 1/10 of 1% of jetliners crashed on takeoff, we would shut down every airline in the country. That is not a risk we are prepared to take – and we believe we know how to address that sort of problem. Are 10,000 to perhaps 50,000 wrongfully imprisoned citizens too many? Can we do better? How? There are no obvious answers. The good news is that the great majority of convicted criminal defendants in America are guilty. The bad news is that a substantial number are not.”

A remembrance of details by a child of sexual assault is not by itself prima fasciae evidence that the assault did in fact occur. It may or may not be true. An adult later giving what appear to be details of a child sexual assault seems compelling and may in fact be true, but it may also be false. Tried in the media or via the internet when a police investigation resulted in no charges as in the Woody Allen case, should give us some cause for doubt. This is particular true when the evidence suggests that in a bitter custody and divorce cases such charges are more likely to be made.

With the Woody Allen case particularly in mind but relating to all of the people mentioned here, I applaud the ability of those who make a conscious choice to separate art from the personal life of the artist-whoever they may be. For those who cannot do so, I respect that as well. Is there some repugnance associated with say enjoying “Chinatown” as a great movie or “Annie Hall” or if I were an opera fan attending a concert of music by Wagner? Yes.

Woody Allen & his Jazz Band

Would I choose to never again watch a Woody Allen movie or one by Polanski? Or even a movie made by a junkie like Hoffman? No. There is an art to differentiation. I believe we should celebrate it. We should also keep our skepticism level high while at the same time when there is independent (the key there being independent) credible evidence of abuse whatever its form it should be dealt with in an evidentiary fashion and prosecution may be warranted under the legal system, even though that system also has its flaws.

We can feel repugnance for the private lives of artists, politicians, and sports players and there have always been plenty of examples to point to throughout history. Whether or not their work can still be appreciated despite this, is a judgment that each individual must make for themselves. As for the lasting worth of their creations that must await the ultimate judgment of history itself.

—

Editor’s note: In addition to being author and/or contributor to a number of respected books and peer-reviewed journals, Phil Cook has a great website where you can find good talks like this one. You may also want to check out the excellent discussion we had with him on Revelations with Erin Pizzey. –DE

Sponsored link

Support us by becoming a member

Sponsored links

Elsewhere on AVfM

B.R. Merrick

We can feel repugnance for the private lives of artists, politicians, and sports players and there have always been plenty of examples to point to throughout history.

I agree. However, given the tone of the only other article at this website to discuss Allen’s case in detail, I am reminded of the good, clean, Christian libertarian argument for pot: “I don’t smoke it myself. I just don’t think it should be illegal.”

I love the caveats that separate the upright people from the true heathen. Okay, in a sarcastic way. I hope for two things here:

1. There are other readers and contributors who see that Woody Allen made the singular mistake of not telling a psycho first that his romantic attachments were headed elsewhere, and towards her adopted daughter.

2. There are other readers and contributors who are big Woody Allen fans like me, and who are unashamed to throw full support behind a Left-leaning New York Jew.

(And in my comment on that other article, I forgot to mention “Bullets over Broadway” and “Small Time Crooks.” Give me another half a day on this story, and I’ll come up with more.)

I’m a fan of a lot of Allen’s films, others leave me cold. Since he makes an average of 1 film a year, I guess that’s hardly surprising.

Kimski

“Give me another half a day on this story, and I’ll come up with more.”

OT, but as an ardent movie fan with an extensive collection of movies dating back to the black and whites of the 20’s and 30’s, I’d rather have you explain to me WHY??
What I see is a constant rehashing of generally the same plots, where a confused semi-academic tries to speed talk his way out of problems he’s made for himself, if he’s not trying to fix the problems of the leading ladies, with disastrous outcomes to all involved.
His movies generally lacks any serious hooks beyond the ho-hum level, and we just know right off the bat that he’ll be worse off at the end compared to the beginning. In between the audience is constantly bombarded with words and feelings on a hysteria level, to a point where you feel like screaming: “STFU and DO something, you little twerp!!”

Kind of like his life has turned out, if you get my drift. 😉

Completely OT, I know, but still…?

Edit: Never mind. I just read Andybob’s comment on the man in another thread, and I think I may have to reevaluate both him and his works. I’m going to download a couple of his movies, and see if age has added any difference to my viewpoints so far.

Take a look at “Radio Days,” “The Purple Rose of Cairo,” and “Everyone Says I Love You,”

My favorite of these is probably “Radio Days.” If it’s Allen’s screen presence that most annoys you (many people find him annoying, others charming), you’ll find he only does voiceover on Radio Days, and he’s not in The Purple Rose of Cairo at all I believe.

Allen is one of those restless creators who is literally constantly working. He has a philosophy that if a movie he makes produces so much as one dollar in profit, it justifies making another movie. Using this philosophy, he has consistently written and directed one film a year since at least 1975. He seems to have taken a year off in 1974 but had several films before that year too.

Thus when looking at his body of work, you just cannot look at the ones most commonly cited, like Manhattan or Annie Hall. Seek people familiar with his work who can tell you about films that are NOT just about “the insecure nebbish/schlamazel intellectual nerd and his internal angst.” I can see why people get tired of that character. Look for some of his lesser-known works like the ones I’ve mentioned here. At this point you have almost 50 films to choose from, so ask someone who’s a bit of a fan and can tell you “OK, you don’t like this side of Woody, check out this other side of Woody.”

I happen to think he’s a genuine genius. No, that does not mean I like all his films, not by any stretch, some of them I did not like at all. But in any case you cannot judge based on the fact that you don’t like that one persona he commonly portrays. In many of his movies, that nerdy stereotypical “New York jewish intellectual” is either a very minor character or not even present.

Kimski

Thanks, Dean. I’ll give the ones you mentioned a try, (or re-try in the case of Purple Rose), and if I like them I’ll buy them and move on from there.
And, yes, I do have a problem with the ‘internal angst’ you mentioned.
I’m more of a ‘jump right in and see what happens’-kind of guy. Not much of that ‘what-if’ wishy-washy stuff here. I tend to fail when I go there. 🙂

B.R. Merrick

You might also like “What’s Up, Tiger Lily?” It’s actually a low-end Japanese rip-off of James Bond, and Allen simply dubs over English like you’re watching a dubbed version of the original. Only, he completely rewrites the script with wonderfully silly dialogue.

And if you’re the jump-into-it sort of guy, you might appreciate “Zelig,” about a man who takes on other people’s characteristics when he is in their presence.

Kimski

Thanks, Mr.Merrick.

And sorry for going completely off topic on your excellent article, Mr.Cook.

I might note by the way that this is the third or fourth time I’ve seen a comment along the lines of “I saw this article and I guess that is the position of this site now.” Unless it’s coming from senior management and they explicitly say so, you should always assume that opinions of the authors are their own, we published it because we thought it was worth publishing not because we necessarily agreed with everything in it. If I had to guess, Paul Elam can’t stand Woody Allen but I like him and I happen to know JTO thinks he’s a genius. Who cares? If the article is good and does not run directly against our mission, we will publish it.

If something is official policy or our official editorial line, we will let you know. 😉

Mia Farrow is a sick, deranged degenerate (like most of Hollywood). She used her daughters as a weapon against Allen, while she (and every other) Hollywood actress defends Roman Polanski.
Funny how these same “women” will defend Polanski, excuse, or justify what he did, yet make these detestable “Lifetime” movies with the common theme of “Men are evil-I’m a victim”. Some even become spokeswomen for “women’s causes”….
On a side note- Mia Farrow pushes her way onto any “Biography” about Polanski, or the beautiful angel, Sharon Tate, and balls her eyes out about how she “loved Sharon like a sister”……..Yet there are those who claim to have seen her (Farrow) in London, and at Polanski’s townhouse on the 5,6, and 7th of Aug. 1969- DAYS before Sharon’s murder. And she was not in the movie he was making there at the time…..
Some sister !!!!